68 



whioh led to tlio ennetnient. I think wo may sny. without nttomptin?; to re- 

 sununarize the arjiiunents. that the workins of the act itself is a most happy 

 (>x]nvssion of the central idea and purpose of the leading spirits who secured 

 tlie laiid-urant enactment. That purpose is dehued as heiuK to promote the 

 liberal and jiractical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits 

 •ind in-ofe-isions of life. It was not the intention of the original movers of this 

 :ict or of the Congress passing it that these colleges should be narrowly and 

 severely and exclusivelv technical in their baccalaureate degree courses. A 

 verv interesting and instructive discussion of this very question arose in the 

 State legislature of Iowa in 1884. The State of Iowa had founded in 18.58 an 

 ; iiricultural college and model farm and had prescribed and limited its courses 

 of study as follnws : (ieology. mineralogy, meteorology, entomology, zoology, 

 unimal "and vegetable anatomy, veterinary surgery, and bookkeeping, and per- 

 mitted no other studies except such as are directly in t<mch with agriculture. 

 Desirins to take advantage of the national land grant, the legislature accepted 

 the trust fund thus created and devoted it to the maintenance and enlargement 

 of the agricultural college thus established by the previous act of the legislature. 

 After a great deal of agitation and unrest the legislature in 1884 repealed the 

 former act prescribing the courses of study, and enacted a new law in-oviding 

 that there should be adopted and taught at the Iowa State Agricultural College 

 a broad. lil)eral. and practical course of study in which the leading branches of 

 learning should relate to agriculture and the mechanic arts, but which should 

 also include such other branches of learning as would most liberally and practi- 

 cally educate the agricultural and industrial classes in the several pursuits and 

 professions in life, including military tactics. It will thus be seen that this bill 

 proposed to change the law so as to provide a general and liberal course of 

 study, in which agriculture and the mechanic arts should have a leading place, 

 and "to repeal the exclusive course that was provided by the statute. Senator 

 P. M. Sutton, of Marshall, in an extended and extremely interesting argument 

 before the senate, contended convincingly that to hold the land-grant funds to 

 the narrow limit:itions of the i)revious law was a perversion of the trust funds 

 by diverting them to a i)uri)o^i' (|uite differei.At from the indication of Congress 

 in passing the land-grant act. 



The wisdom of this lil)eral purpose of Congress in the original act is worthy 

 ot all praise when we consider the character of the constituency of these 

 colleges. The voung men and women who go up to college in these institutions 

 :'re very seldom prepared for or desirous of receiving a severely technical 

 course. " For the most i)art, the land-grant college is the only college and the 

 only opportunit.\- for higher education thaf these young peoi)le will find. These 

 colleges are (piite different from institutes of technology opened in the heart 

 of great cities and in the midst of extensive manufacturing enterprises. Such 

 technical institutes have for their sole purpose the technical education of 

 specialists. It is not yet true, and probably never will be true, of the land- 

 grant colleges that they are to be in the severe and narrow sense technical 

 institutions. 



There is a striking harmony between the utterances of the leading, aggressive 

 educators of the present and the utterances of the men who urged forward the 

 land-grant enactment. For instance, President Dabney. of the University of 

 Cleveland, in his inaugural address makes the following statement: 



" Since higher education produces more efficient men and thus increases the 

 ])roductivitv. the wealth, and the power of the nation, it is the duty of the 

 State or city to provide not only free schools, but colleges and universities for 

 the higher training of its citizens." 



And Doctor P>arrows. general superintendent of education in the Philippines, 

 in a recent address, says the ideals of the I'liilipiiine educational work include 

 " a large, general purpose to raise the spiritual character, the industrial effi- 

 cieiK-v, and the political capacity of the entire people." 



The land-grant law is a significant and notable expression of the ideal of 

 modern democracy in the si)here of education. The old aristocratic notion of a 

 .scholarly class, whose hands should be unsoiled by labor and whose refined 

 minds should be untainted by industrialism, has given way to the democratic 

 ideal of e(iuality. This does not mean that all men are alike cai)able of higher 

 education and efficiency, but it does mean that the line of division between 

 {•lasses of men shall not 1»e artificial and arbitrary, but natural and spiritual. 

 The educational ideal of democracy is that the iirivi leges of education and of 

 higher education shall be ojien to all who have the initial ambition, the perse- 

 verance, and the talents to improve sudi opportunities. 



